Urban Mobility
In what ways are these new transportation services and amenities—and the systems necessary to support and deliver them—similar to those discussed in previous weeks? In what important ways are they different? How are physical mobility and social mobility connected in an urban context? Be sure to think about the scale of these systems, how they are delivered and managed, the effects they have on urban development, and who they serve.
Student Reflection:
Like the other amenities we’ve examined, transportation systems were brought to the public’s attention as they began to experience the effects of population growth and economic activity in the city. The physical expansion of the city necessitated more space, and soon urban economic centers were surrounded by suburban residential neighborhoods. A more extensive rail network allowed for residents to continue a commuter lifestyle. In the past, people wished to travel to the city and be at the center of urban life, but now they chose to distance themselves.
While a further commute zone alleviated urban crowding, the geographic separation between classes translated to a social division. The suburbs generally tended to be wealthier, and urban residents began to protest streetcar construction, citing noise and environmental concerns. There was an even more nuanced division of the city when observing how when transit cities were more integrated into city life, housing pricing began to vary based on proximity to stations.
The concept behind services like healthcare, police forces, and education were grounded in the idea of equal services for all, but transportation offered more stratified choices. People would take different modes of transit depending on what they could afford, if they could even afford in the first place to not walk by foot at all. Private stagecoaches were the most expensive, but the creation of the omnibus opened up this amenity to the middle class. The rise of electric technology in streetcars finally made them affordable. There still were evident signs of division, and even segregation, but their widespread accessibility made them conducive to the beginning of more heterogeneous social interactions.
Transportation, among other amenities, brings about the question of the relationship between the government, its citizens, and third party interest groups. Early modes of horsecar networks and railways were strongly controlled by private companies. The negative sentiment from passengers, politicians, and other interest groups about poor service and corruption made it difficult to subsidize these businesses, and other amenities like hospitals were prioritized in the federal budget. The push for funding in the 1960s and competition from companies in an adjacent industry finally facilitated a more balanced shift between privatization and federal management, allowing voters to be more involved in implementing these networks.
[by an MIT student, reproduced with permission]
